[Xastir-Dev] Short list, stable release, then Xastir-2development?

[Tom Young]

Yes, precisely.  One server supporting two databases: a volatile, packet
database; and a non-volatile, mapping database.  That way, vacuuming
etc. would be run more frequently on the volatile database.    I think
these are naturally distinct data anyway, since
there is no natural, foreign key relationship, between the two, that
comes to mind.    

	Cheers, 

		-Tom, KD1UL

"Curt Mills, WE7U" wrote:
> 
> On Fri, 14 Mar 2003, Gerry Creager N5JXS wrote:
> 
> > Or, more precisely, separate tables. We don't need several instances of
> > the database running.  That _would_ be a resource hog.
> 
> I think perhaps he was talking about one instance of the database
> server, but separate databases inside that server (which equate to
> separate file storage) for the volatile/less-volatile types of data.
> 
> We could certainly do that, and if we were careful we could also
> allow the user to connect to different databases for each, so that
> distributed map servers are a definite possibility.
> 
> --
> Curt Mills, WE7U                    hacker_NO_SPAM_ at tc.fluke.com
> Senior Methods Engineer/SysAdmin
> "Lotto:    A tax on people who are bad at math!"
> "Windows:  Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates!" -- WE7U
> "The world DOES revolve around me:  I picked the coordinate system!"

-- 
Tom Young
SoftWare Services
47 MITCHELL STREET
STAMFORD, CT 06902-7832
(203)357-9260
tom at twyoung.com  
ICCA-FW Vice President #21180
http://www.twyoung.com  
ICQ#: 4891876